Why we should stop using URL shorteners

Universal Resource Locator (URL) shorteners have been around since the early 2000’s^[1]. A URL shortener takes an otherwise ugly hyperlink and converts it to something short and catchy. This can be helpful if users have to manually type in an address, such as from a PowerPoint presentation, or if the number of characters are limited (such as on an advertisement). However, they also normalize following links where we have no idea what is on the other end. Additionally, using a URL shortening service means that critical communication can be out of the control of the original organization. Here I’ll outline the benefits and pitfalls of URL shortening (as I see them) and why I ultimately don’t see why they are worth it.

Benefits

There are some key elements in which shortened URLs do serve a defined purpose.

Ease of communication

I have often seen short URLs on slide decks for the audience to go to a particular resource for more information. These short URLs are usually accompanied by a QR code, and 80% of the audience ends up scanning the QR code because it is faster than manually typing in even something as short as 10 characters (https:// alone takes up 8 and is unavoidable).

Likewise in advertisements on buses, the short URL is again presented beside a QR code. I don’t see the point in using the short URL when the full path can be easily encoded into the QR code.

Link tracking

Often times companies or organizations will want to track how many times a specific link has been clicked, and many link shortening services provide these metrics as part of their offering. I could see this being useful for A/B testing a particular campaign, because you could put 10 different short URLs in different locations and then see how each one performed.

Flaws

Short URLs can redirect to any URL

As the user navigating to a short URL, there is no way of knowing the website that is on the other end. This may not be a big deal when the short URL is presented in a slide deck, however when it is in an email it can seem very suspicious. Since most URLs are on less common top level domains (TLDs) that are different than the TLD that the organization uses for the rest of its web presence it can be very difficult for the user to know if the link is trustworthy.

This isn’t just the case for commercial providers such as dub.co but even large enterprise companies. As an example, is the following domain legit, and if so, who is the organization behind it?

aka.ms

The aka stands for “Also Known As” and the “MS” stands for “Microsoft”. A repository showing all of the links (well, in theory, it seems to be out of date) can be found in the Microsoft GitHub. There is no way that the average user is going to know that either this repository exists, or how to verify that this domain is legit. By normalizing link shortening like this, it conditions users to be more accepting of links that don’t point to well known domains (such as microsoft.com or onedrive.com).

Interestingly, the New York Times also uses the .ms TLD for permalinks. https://nyti.ms will redirect to the homepage. They were so close, it really bugs me that there is no e.

Yes, QR codes have this same issue, but scanning a QR code through an email or on the web in general is not a common practice. If someone sends you an email with a QR code to scan, you should not scan it.

Short URLs can be shut down, en masse

If a single company shuts down, then (usually) all of the links on their domain are lost. When a short URL provider shuts down, all the links are lost. This can have a huge impact on the archival integrity of old links. Take Google’s decision to shutdown goo.gl links, which will likely impact millions of links. Most of the short URLs that I see are bitly or tinyurl, there isn’t a huge amount of competition in the space.

Alternatives to short URLs

Aside from QR codes, there are other options depending on the size of the organization. One solution could just be to run a rerouting service from the primary domain. For example, I could make markpitblado.me/g2w2 link to this page. The other option is just to use hyperlinking to attach the full URL string to a particular word or phrase, as I have done here. Yes, it obscures the destination URL, but at least the user can hover over the link and see the actual destination URL (usually in the bottom left of the program). This is better than a short URL for security, while keeping the benefits of not having a long URL in text.

Overall, I am just not sold on short URLs, especially large commercial ones that require regular payment for the links to stay active. Perhaps there is something that I am missing, and if so, I would love to learn about it. Feel free to reply by email if you have an angle that I haven’t seen here.